Intolerant is baking a cake for a person that's on their fourth marriage while refusing to bake one for a lesbian couple that is finally able to marry after twenty years together.
"Intolerant" is defining "intolerant" as: "Intolerant is baking a cake for a person that's on their fourth marriage while refusing to bake one for a lesbian couple that is finally able to marry after twenty years together"...
No,it's not. It is intolerant to say to someone that you are not as important, not worthy of the same consideration as anyone else. How else would you define intolerant?
An irony... i can't think a way to define "intolerant" without being... intolerant!
I can't comment for the quality (i need samples send to Greece!), but this is a VERY large variety for just one state! By the way... right now (and i mean right now) i smoke some (North?) Carolina Burley mixed with (Zimbabwe) Virginia and Greek Basma anatolian type (sort leaf) tobacco!
Intolerant is baking a cake for a person that's on their fourth marriage while refusing to bake one for a lesbian couple that is finally able to marry after twenty years together.
"Intolerant" is defining "intolerant" as: "Intolerant is baking a cake for a person that's on their fourth marriage while refusing to bake one for a lesbian couple that is finally able to marry after twenty years together"...
O.K, let's start from the beginning... in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth... no, i just kidding, let's read my original comment:
Israel-based company, which specializes in "network monetization"
STEREOTYPING IS BAD - mkay?
Sorry, i forgot to ask you to pull the stick out of your ass before reading it... anyway: it is a fucking naive joke (you know, "i fight anti-Semitism and stereotypes", plus... Jews and money!), plus... a fact of life!
Now let's talk about this "fact of life": an Indian guy gets a "cease-and-desist" from an Israeli company... are you still with me? O.K., let's continue. What this guy must do now for fighting back? Because if he gets in a plane and go to that Israeli company's headquarters to talk to them, they may ask him "how many Jews died in WW2?", and if he is a man of truth he must answer: much less than 6 millions*! (true story from Greece: an Indian illegal immigrant in Greece steals some stuff, gets arrested, in the police station they discover a Swastika tattoo and they accused him for being a member of our Greek -anti-immigration- NaZi party!!! Poor guy had to explain that this was a Hinduistic symbol...)
* since it is illigal for me to claim that less than 6 millions Jews died in WW2, and because i don't go to jail (yes, it is the law in most of Europe...), i declare that i support the lie of the 6 millions...
Will you please shut the fuck up, go the fuck away, and spare us your endless fucking stream of bullshit and drivel?
kthanksbye
I fight anti-Semitism and stereotypes...
In a more serious tone, and from the summary: "He traced the file back to Flash Networks, an Israel-based company, which specializes in "network monetization" and posted the source on GitHub. Since then, he has received a cease-and-desist from Flash Networks and the code on GitHub has been removed following a DMCA takedown notice." - we Greeks make good yogurt... next time you will get a "cease-and-desist" don't bother tracing it back to us!
You're obviously a beer (and wine) aficionado. I was shy with Greek beer out of modesty, but i had Germans/British (who drunk it in the right enviroment: very cold in our very hot Greek summer) that loved it. And yes, in winter i prefer some more complex, full body beers (mostly German/nothern/central European, but we have some Greek also for that cases!).
Same with our Greek Retsina (which i love personaly) - yes, served cold in our Greek summer is great, but trying to drink it in German winter...
Yes, i agree - of course that is not a problem of German beer (you can find GREAT German pils/lagers plus others) but with the typical tourist (what the fuck is the need to have Bud in Germany?... IN GERMANY!? The same we have it in Greece: tourists!)
Never had an American "microbrew" beer, but i am afraid that you may be right, because, if you don't have some tradition with microbrew, you end up doing what you describe.
Yes, that "mass-produced watery beer" (some brands of it imported in Europe (!)... for American tourists!) is my experience of American beer - i am glad that you mentioned good quality small brewery variety exist nowadays in the States, i am happy for you!
I was not trying to insult Yankees (i LOVE bourbon!), i just made a comparison (even our mass-produced -EVEN THE GREEK BRANDS, which is probably the worse in Europe- is decent beer).
If DeVry's Master of Finance program allows resits, you should look into it. Because you appear to have debtors and creditors the wrong way round.
You aren't that fucking 7 digit windbag who goes on about Aristophanes, are you?
It is Antisthenes, not "Aristophanes" - and no, he is not me, i always post with my pseudonymous 7 digit account, plus i made many comments recognizing Greeks as debtors and Germans as creditors!
But since you mentioned Aristophanes: The young and immature will get old and mature, the uneducated can be educated, and a drunk will get sober, but stupidity lasts forever...
I love Germany, but I don't know of any German beers that are all that good. They certainly have the reputation but the reality has always been disappointing.
I can accept your opinion IF you are from some of Germany's neighbor countries (e.g., Austria/Belgium/Czech - great beers!), or at least from Europe (e.g., i am from Greece, maybe the European country with the least "beer" tradition, but still we have a couple of decent large-scale production beers, plus, a dozen of good micro-brew beers), OR... you exclude from your good beer list any American (at least large-scale production - i can accept that some good micro-brew beers exist in USA... from German descendents!).
There is *at least* one more problem: every Westerner that knows what "the problem" is being attacked as "racist" by other Westerners who don't understand "the problem"!
fortunately, they want each other dead as well, but they are reproducing faster than they are killing each other, so it's still a problem for the west to deal with.
Thank Allah, yes... they like to kill each other also - but we Westerners must protect ourselves (and this is the only way to give Muslims a chance to become civilized... imagine if we Westerners disappear... poor Muslims, poor Humans!)
I don't know any Muslim country invaded by Westerners, without local Muslims (and not just a minority - e.g., in Iraq it was the Shia and Kurdish *majority* suffering under Saddam, in Afghanistan was also the *majority* - even the "United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan"!- oppresed by the Talibans, in Libya the same...) asking us to invade.
You seem to argue that an oppressed majority calling for liberation is justification of an invasion. you did not show that just because it was a majority that was oppressed it was a majority that wished invasion. That implies that only some of the oppressed need to desire invasion to justify invasion.
If in the United States, the Christians, a majority, some of whom claim are oppressed by liberal-minded media, had a few members who called for Putin to liberate the United States, would that be more or less just an invasion in your world view?
I thought it was easy to understand that the vast majority of the oppresed majority wanted the West's intervention:
* Kuwait - it (and the rest of Arab states) asked the West to liberate it from Iraq.
* Iraq - the vast majority of the oppresed majority (i.e., Shia and Kurds) asked and received! Hint: check the first election in Iraq after the fall of Saddam.
* Afghanistan - even the "United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan" (a.k.a. "North Alliance" - old friends of Soviets!) asked the West for help (not that the US needed any permision to go get Bin Laden hidding there, and the Talibans who ruled Afghanistan proudly protected, saying to US: we don't give him to you...)
* Libya - East and West, united against Gaddafi (hidding in a hole... like Saddam! notice the "Allahu Akbar")
But your basic question is "if an oppressed majority calling for liberation is justification of an invasion?". Yes it is, or at least invalidates this "the West goes to Muslim countries uninvited". You don't have to agree with the liberation of the oppressed, but you can not claim that the West attacks Muslims (especially that it does it "in the name of God", as many, Muslims and Westerners, -ridiculously- claim)
In 600 AD the entire Mediterranean was Christian. By 700 North Africa, the Mideast and even parts of Europe were Muslim. All of these areas were converted by the sword, not through proselytizing. Mainly by invasion. From the early medieval period until the 16th century Islam continued to encroach on European lands. It attacked the Byzantine empire, which resulted in them asking Rome for help. That was the Crusades, an effort at self defense for Byzantium and an attempt to ensure pilgrims could continue to visit sites in Christian Holy Lands in the Mideast.
I am Greek... when i hear/read those Westerners who, instead of recognizing the historic truth, insist on blaming the Western/Christian worlds for defending itself from the Muslim hordes... you understand! No need for them to accept some superiority of the Western (Greek-Roman AND Christian) Civilization, they just need to stop distorting historic facts AND read the Islamic history (writen by Muslims: oh... they are so proud for their mass conversion by the sword that they don't hide it!).
Absolutely agree! I am a (sexist and racist) Greek... my ancient ancestors used to say "Thank Zeus that i was born as a human and not a beast, a man and not a woman, a Greek and not a barbarian" - usually barbarians used to agree and some/many tried to become "Greeks", in the same way nowadays i try to become more of a "German" (you know our state's little financial crisis!).
Unfortunately, we, "people of (some common) reason", are usually cowards... and our self-censorship leads to your very *wise* last question: How is one to "choose" when one is forbidden to even make a value judgement (or even worse, dare to discuss it openly)?
As though stepping through an airport scanner compares to being thrown off a roof for one's sexual orientation.Small wonder that everyone is laughing at the moral equivalence liberals.
And what you describe (i.e., invalidating any rightful criticism of Muslims, with this -ridiculous in my opinion- "moral equivalence") is always ridiculed by those unfortunate to live among, and inevitably oppressed by, Muslims!
I don't know any Muslim country invaded by Westerners, without local Muslims (and not just a minority - e.g., in Iraq it was the Shia and Kurdish *majority* suffering under Saddam, in Afghanistan was also the *majority* - even the "United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan"!- oppresed by the Talibans, in Libya the same...) asking us to invade. Don't make the common mistake to think that we go there uninvited, and don't become a victim of your own opinion (i.e., even if you disagree with going there -something that i will respect-, you should not convert that in your mind as an invasion).
we interfere in their political systems
You mean that we go there and vote for their elected representatives? The Muslim countries you probably refering to, don't have a "political system" (other than the "well known" to those been oppressed there - AND IT IS NOT OUR FAULT!). You are the victim of the usual mistake: while even without any interaction with us, the Muslims there will had the same problematic "political system", just because we interact with them you think we interfere. But then you will be the first to blame us for not doing anything, when you will watch in TV local Muslims crying "why the West does not do something?"
I am afraid that Persians started to gradually become *less* civilized the moment they were forced to become Muslims - plus, this "algebra" thing is someway a "myth" (with some truth of course, i don't try to deny it totally - i am a G[r]eek!)
I seriously fail to understand how we, the Western (Greek-Roman AND Christian) Civilization, "provoke the Muslims" (and "in a way that it has never done to us"?!), plus, that (general) Western (Greek-Roman AND Christian) Civilization can be adopted by anyone who wants to be civilized* (and since i am a Greek that mentioned the Persians: Persians, who had a civilized enough culture before they were forced to become Muslims, have done it in some extend, so, excluding their current barbaric Muslim religion, they are civilized enough "barbarians", surely more than any Arab for example - take it from a Greek, a couple of milleniums "old enemy" of the Persians!). If we stop interacting with the "Muslim world" (something that many Muslim want, BUT MANY WESTERNERS WANT ALSO!), what you think will be the outcome for the Muslims? And did you know that it is Muslims those who ask from us, Westerners, to "interact", and then, the same people, call that a "provocation" - i surely don't understand why it is our fault!
* Let's not start a "relevitism" of the "what you mean civilized?" type.
"How could such an advanced culture have staged such bloody spectacles?"
Because however you doll up humanity..... people are very primal under the surface, and are capable of a great many violent things.
And however you doll up humanity today, it is merely an illusion that anything has changed since then.
Almost half a *millenium* before the Romans built Colosseum (and had their bloody spectacles in it - including killing Christians!), (we) Greeks had fought the Persian invadors and won - one of those Greeks fighting against them, Aeschylus (who was so proud for this that asked to be the only thing mentioned in his grave), wrote a tragedy called "The Persians": instead of writing "Greece... fuck yeah... we fucked you barbarians!", he mostly wrote about the psychological drama experienced by the Persians back home, in a way that... well, i watched this tragedy performed in one of our ancient Greek theaters, and i felt pity for the Persians!
My point is that "Humanity" it too "big" of a word to make such statements about how it is an illusion that has changed - it is surely better today than what it was at the Colosseum times (but at that time it was worse than what it was when Greeks were "in charge" of humanity!). BUT today we have the "Muslim world" (doing what we all know) against the Western (Greek-Roman AND Christian) Civilization.
In scientific language I believe what you are referring to is called "conjecture", but i might be wrong. A hypothesis must be falsifiavle
You are not wrong (except of this "must"!?)... but neither i am! My problem and criticism is the "hard" science's indefinite terminology (e.g., a "conjecture" is a term mostly used in Math... and in Physics' Math!). Think this: how you call a "conjecture" in German/Slavic/Greek*? And you may understand how problematic is to have indefinite terminology for basic phases of the "scientific method" (i.e., from "hypothesis" to "theory").
* i don't just mean how you translate the natual language word, but what term is used for this phase (which is a hypothesis without a formal proof... right? if you reply, at least try to give me an English definition for a "-scientific- conjecture" that will cover all "hard" science domains!)
Slashdot Mirror
Intolerant is baking a cake for a person that's on their fourth marriage while refusing to bake one for a lesbian couple that is finally able to marry after twenty years together.
"Intolerant" is defining "intolerant" as: "Intolerant is baking a cake for a person that's on their fourth marriage while refusing to bake one for a lesbian couple that is finally able to marry after twenty years together"...
No,it's not. It is intolerant to say to someone that you are not as important, not worthy of the same consideration as anyone else. How else would you define intolerant?
An irony... i can't think a way to define "intolerant" without being... intolerant!
I can't comment for the quality (i need samples send to Greece!), but this is a VERY large variety for just one state! By the way... right now (and i mean right now) i smoke some (North?) Carolina Burley mixed with (Zimbabwe) Virginia and Greek Basma anatolian type (sort leaf) tobacco!
Intolerant is baking a cake for a person that's on their fourth marriage while refusing to bake one for a lesbian couple that is finally able to marry after twenty years together.
"Intolerant" is defining "intolerant" as: "Intolerant is baking a cake for a person that's on their fourth marriage while refusing to bake one for a lesbian couple that is finally able to marry after twenty years together"...
Israel-based company, which specializes in "network monetization"
STEREOTYPING IS BAD - mkay?
Sorry, i forgot to ask you to pull the stick out of your ass before reading it... anyway: it is a fucking naive joke (you know, "i fight anti-Semitism and stereotypes", plus... Jews and money!), plus... a fact of life!
Now let's talk about this "fact of life": an Indian guy gets a "cease-and-desist" from an Israeli company... are you still with me? O.K., let's continue. What this guy must do now for fighting back? Because if he gets in a plane and go to that Israeli company's headquarters to talk to them, they may ask him "how many Jews died in WW2?", and if he is a man of truth he must answer: much less than 6 millions*! (true story from Greece: an Indian illegal immigrant in Greece steals some stuff, gets arrested, in the police station they discover a Swastika tattoo and they accused him for being a member of our Greek -anti-immigration- NaZi party!!! Poor guy had to explain that this was a Hinduistic symbol...)
Moral of this comment: pull the stick out of your ass...
* since it is illigal for me to claim that less than 6 millions Jews died in WW2, and because i don't go to jail (yes, it is the law in most of Europe...), i declare that i support the lie of the 6 millions...
Will you please shut the fuck up, go the fuck away, and spare us your endless fucking stream of bullshit and drivel?
kthanksbye
I fight anti-Semitism and stereotypes...
In a more serious tone, and from the summary: "He traced the file back to Flash Networks, an Israel-based company, which specializes in "network monetization" and posted the source on GitHub. Since then, he has received a cease-and-desist from Flash Networks and the code on GitHub has been removed following a DMCA takedown notice." - we Greeks make good yogurt... next time you will get a "cease-and-desist" don't bother tracing it back to us!
Israel-based company, which specializes in "network monetization"
STEREOTYPING IS BAD - mkay?
Ha... you are correct! I was talking for the "imported from USA" Bud (we have it in Greece for the tourists from the States)...
You're obviously a beer (and wine) aficionado.
I was shy with Greek beer out of modesty, but i had Germans/British (who drunk it in the right enviroment: very cold in our very hot Greek summer) that loved it. And yes, in winter i prefer some more complex, full body beers (mostly German/nothern/central European, but we have some Greek also for that cases!).
Same with our Greek Retsina (which i love personaly) - yes, served cold in our Greek summer is great, but trying to drink it in German winter...
Yes, i agree - of course that is not a problem of German beer (you can find GREAT German pils/lagers plus others) but with the typical tourist (what the fuck is the need to have Bud in Germany?... IN GERMANY!? The same we have it in Greece: tourists!)
Never had an American "microbrew" beer, but i am afraid that you may be right, because, if you don't have some tradition with microbrew, you end up doing what you describe.
I agree - and if you just eliminate Bud... you saved the whole world!
TL;DR version: there isn't that much to gain from more rigorously defining basic scientific terms.
My answer... in bold!
Yes, that "mass-produced watery beer" (some brands of it imported in Europe (!)... for American tourists!) is my experience of American beer - i am glad that you mentioned good quality small brewery variety exist nowadays in the States, i am happy for you!
I was not trying to insult Yankees (i LOVE bourbon!), i just made a comparison (even our mass-produced -EVEN THE GREEK BRANDS, which is probably the worse in Europe- is decent beer).
If DeVry's Master of Finance program allows resits, you should look into it. Because you appear to have debtors and creditors the wrong way round.
You aren't that fucking 7 digit windbag who goes on about Aristophanes, are you?
It is Antisthenes, not "Aristophanes" - and no, he is not me, i always post with my pseudonymous 7 digit account, plus i made many comments recognizing Greeks as debtors and Germans as creditors!
But since you mentioned Aristophanes: The young and immature will get old and mature, the uneducated can be educated, and a drunk will get sober, but stupidity lasts forever...
I love Germany, but I don't know of any German beers that are all that good. They certainly have the reputation but the reality has always been disappointing.
I can accept your opinion IF you are from some of Germany's neighbor countries (e.g., Austria/Belgium/Czech - great beers!), or at least from Europe (e.g., i am from Greece, maybe the European country with the least "beer" tradition, but still we have a couple of decent large-scale production beers, plus, a dozen of good micro-brew beers), OR... you exclude from your good beer list any American (at least large-scale production - i can accept that some good micro-brew beers exist in USA... from German descendents!).
well the problem is they want us dead.
There is *at least* one more problem: every Westerner that knows what "the problem" is being attacked as "racist" by other Westerners who don't understand "the problem"!
fortunately, they want each other dead as well, but they are reproducing faster than they are killing each other, so it's still a problem for the west to deal with.
Thank Allah, yes... they like to kill each other also - but we Westerners must protect ourselves (and this is the only way to give Muslims a chance to become civilized... imagine if we Westerners disappear... poor Muslims, poor Humans!)
I don't know any Muslim country invaded by Westerners, without local Muslims (and not just a minority - e.g., in Iraq it was the Shia and Kurdish *majority* suffering under Saddam, in Afghanistan was also the *majority* - even the "United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan"!- oppresed by the Talibans, in Libya the same...) asking us to invade.
You seem to argue that an oppressed majority calling for liberation is justification of an invasion. you did not show that just because it was a majority that was oppressed it was a majority that wished invasion. That implies that only some of the oppressed need to desire invasion to justify invasion.
If in the United States, the Christians, a majority, some of whom claim are oppressed by liberal-minded media, had a few members who called for Putin to liberate the United States, would that be more or less just an invasion in your world view?
I thought it was easy to understand that the vast majority of the oppresed majority wanted the West's intervention:
* Kuwait - it (and the rest of Arab states) asked the West to liberate it from Iraq.
* Iraq - the vast majority of the oppresed majority (i.e., Shia and Kurds) asked and received! Hint: check the first election in Iraq after the fall of Saddam.
* Afghanistan - even the "United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan" (a.k.a. "North Alliance" - old friends of Soviets!) asked the West for help (not that the US needed any permision to go get Bin Laden hidding there, and the Talibans who ruled Afghanistan proudly protected, saying to US: we don't give him to you...)
* Libya - East and West, united against Gaddafi (hidding in a hole... like Saddam! notice the "Allahu Akbar")
But your basic question is "if an oppressed majority calling for liberation is justification of an invasion?". Yes it is, or at least invalidates this "the West goes to Muslim countries uninvited". You don't have to agree with the liberation of the oppressed, but you can not claim that the West attacks Muslims (especially that it does it "in the name of God", as many, Muslims and Westerners, -ridiculously- claim)
In 600 AD the entire Mediterranean was Christian. By 700 North Africa, the Mideast and even parts of Europe were Muslim. All of these areas were converted by the sword, not through proselytizing. Mainly by invasion. From the early medieval period until the 16th century Islam continued to encroach on European lands. It attacked the Byzantine empire, which resulted in them asking Rome for help. That was the Crusades, an effort at self defense for Byzantium and an attempt to ensure pilgrims could continue to visit sites in Christian Holy Lands in the Mideast.
I am Greek... when i hear/read those Westerners who, instead of recognizing the historic truth, insist on blaming the Western/Christian worlds for defending itself from the Muslim hordes... you understand! No need for them to accept some superiority of the Western (Greek-Roman AND Christian) Civilization, they just need to stop distorting historic facts AND read the Islamic history (writen by Muslims: oh... they are so proud for their mass conversion by the sword that they don't hide it!).
Unfortunately, we, "people of (some common) reason", are usually cowards... and our self-censorship leads to your very *wise* last question: How is one to "choose" when one is forbidden to even make a value judgement (or even worse, dare to discuss it openly)?
As though stepping through an airport scanner compares to being thrown off a roof for one's sexual orientation.Small wonder that everyone is laughing at the moral equivalence liberals.
And what you describe (i.e., invalidating any rightful criticism of Muslims, with this -ridiculous in my opinion- "moral equivalence") is always ridiculed by those unfortunate to live among, and inevitably oppressed by, Muslims!
we invade their countries
I don't know any Muslim country invaded by Westerners, without local Muslims (and not just a minority - e.g., in Iraq it was the Shia and Kurdish *majority* suffering under Saddam, in Afghanistan was also the *majority* - even the "United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan"!- oppresed by the Talibans, in Libya the same...) asking us to invade. Don't make the common mistake to think that we go there uninvited, and don't become a victim of your own opinion (i.e., even if you disagree with going there -something that i will respect-, you should not convert that in your mind as an invasion).
we interfere in their political systems
You mean that we go there and vote for their elected representatives? The Muslim countries you probably refering to, don't have a "political system" (other than the "well known" to those been oppressed there - AND IT IS NOT OUR FAULT!). You are the victim of the usual mistake: while even without any interaction with us, the Muslims there will had the same problematic "political system", just because we interact with them you think we interfere. But then you will be the first to blame us for not doing anything, when you will watch in TV local Muslims crying "why the West does not do something?"
we call them terrorists.
Hmmm... i wonder why...
I am afraid that Persians started to gradually become *less* civilized the moment they were forced to become Muslims - plus, this "algebra" thing is someway a "myth" (with some truth of course, i don't try to deny it totally - i am a G[r]eek!)
* Let's not start a "relevitism" of the "what you mean civilized?" type.
"How could such an advanced culture have staged such bloody spectacles?"
Because however you doll up humanity..... people are very primal under the surface, and are capable of a great many violent things.
And however you doll up humanity today, it is merely an illusion that anything has changed since then.
Almost half a *millenium* before the Romans built Colosseum (and had their bloody spectacles in it - including killing Christians!), (we) Greeks had fought the Persian invadors and won - one of those Greeks fighting against them, Aeschylus (who was so proud for this that asked to be the only thing mentioned in his grave), wrote a tragedy called "The Persians": instead of writing "Greece... fuck yeah... we fucked you barbarians!", he mostly wrote about the psychological drama experienced by the Persians back home, in a way that... well, i watched this tragedy performed in one of our ancient Greek theaters, and i felt pity for the Persians!
My point is that "Humanity" it too "big" of a word to make such statements about how it is an illusion that has changed - it is surely better today than what it was at the Colosseum times (but at that time it was worse than what it was when Greeks were "in charge" of humanity!). BUT today we have the "Muslim world" (doing what we all know) against the Western (Greek-Roman AND Christian) Civilization.
Humanity must choose its civilization.
In scientific language I believe what you are referring to is called "conjecture", but i might be wrong. A hypothesis must be falsifiavle
You are not wrong (except of this "must"!?)... but neither i am! My problem and criticism is the "hard" science's indefinite terminology (e.g., a "conjecture" is a term mostly used in Math... and in Physics' Math!). Think this: how you call a "conjecture" in German/Slavic/Greek*? And you may understand how problematic is to have indefinite terminology for basic phases of the "scientific method" (i.e., from "hypothesis" to "theory").
* i don't just mean how you translate the natual language word, but what term is used for this phase (which is a hypothesis without a formal proof... right? if you reply, at least try to give me an English definition for a "-scientific- conjecture" that will cover all "hard" science domains!)